Imaging of Acute Appendicitis in Adults: Computed Tomography

  • Caroline Keyzer
  • Pierre Alain Gevenois
Part of the Medical Radiology book series (MEDRAD)


Computed Tomography (CT) examination of the entire abdomen and pelvis is more and more frequently performed in patients suspected of acute appendicitis but this examination can be obtained with various CT protocols. As there are still controversies regarding these protocols, this chapter will discuss their differences in terms of contrast material and anatomic coverage. This chapter will also review the CT features of acute appendicitis and the alternative diseases that can be detected at CT, including the impact of saving radiation dose on these features and alternative diagnoses.


Acute Appendicitis Oral Contrast Normal Appendix Entire Abdomen Right Lower Quadrant 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.



Body mass index


Multi-planar reformations


Negative predictive value


Positive predictive value


Right lower quadrant


  1. Anderson BA, Salem L, Flum DR (2005) A systematic review of whether oral contrast is necessary for the computed tomography diagnosis of appendicitis in adults. Am J Surg 190:474–478PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Anderson SW, Soto JA, Lucey BC et al (2009) Abdominal 64-MDCT for suspected appendicitis: the use of oral and IV contrast material versus IV contrast material only. Am J Roentgenol 193:1282–1288CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Anderson SW, Rhea JT, Milch HN, Ozonoff A, Lucey BC, Soto JA (2010) Influence of body habitus and use of oral contrast on reader confidence in patients with suspected acute appendicitis using 64 MDCT. Emerg Radiol 17(6):445–453PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Balthazar EJ, Megibow AJ, Hulnick D, Gordon RB, Naidich DP, Beranbaum ER (1986) CT of appendicitis. Am J Roentgenol 147:705–710Google Scholar
  5. Balthazar EJ, Birnbaum BA, Yee J, Megibow AJ, Roshkow J, Gray C (1994) Acute appendicitis: CT and US correlation in 100 patients. Radiology 190:31–35PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Benjaminov O, Atri M, Hamilton P, Rappaport D (2002) Frequency of visualization and thickness of normal appendix at non-enhanced helical CT. Radiology 225:400–406PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Birnbaum BA, Wilson SR (2000) Appendicitis at the millennium. Radiology 215:337–348PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Bixby SD, Lucey BC, Soto JA, Theysohn JM, Ozonoff A, Varghese JC (2006) Perforated versus non-perforated acute appendicitis: Accuracy of multi-detector CT detection. Radiology 241:780–786PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Choi D, Park H, Lee YR et al (2003) The most useful findings for diagnosing acute appendicitis on contrast-enhanced helical CT. Acta Radiol 44:574–582PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Daly CP, Cohan RH, Francis IR, Caoili EM, Ellis JH, Nan B (2005) Incidence of acute appendicitis in patients with equivocal CT findings. Am J Roentgenol 184:1813–1820Google Scholar
  11. Dearing DD, Recabaren JA, Alexander M (2008) Can computed tomography scan be performed effectively in the diagnosis of acute appendicitis without the added morbidity of rectal contrast? Am Surg 74:917–920PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Ege G, Akman H, Sahin A, Bugra D, Kuzucu K (2002) Diagnostic value of unenhanced helical CT in adult patients with suspected acute appendicitis. Br J Radiol 75:721–725PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Foley TA, Earnest F, Nathan MA, Hough DM, Schiller HJ, Hoskin TL (2005) Differentiation of non-perforated from perforated appendicitis: Accuracy of CT diagnosis and relationship of CT findings to length of hospital stay. Radiology 235:89–96PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Funaki B, Grosskreutz SR, Funaki CN (1998) Using unenhanced helical CT with enteric contrast material for suspected appendicitis in patients treated at a community hospital. Am J Roentgenol 171:997–1001Google Scholar
  15. Ganguli S, Raptopoulos V, Komlos F, Siewert B, Kruskal JB (2006) Right lower quadrant pain: Value of the non-visualized appendix in patients at multi-detector CT. Radiology 241:175–180PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Hershko DD, Awad N, Fischer D et al (2007) Focused helical CT using rectal contrast material only as the preferred technique for the diagnosis of suspected acute appendicitis: a prospective, randomized, controlled study comparing three different techniques. Dis Colon Rectum 50:1223–1229PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Horrow MM, White DS, Horrow JC (2003) Differentiation of perforated from non-perforated appendicitis at CT. Radiology 227:46–51PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Jacobs JE, Birnbaum BA, Macari M et al (2001) Acute appendicitis: Comparison of helical CT diagnosis focused technique with oral contrast material versus non-focused technique with oral and intravenous contrast material. Radiology 220:683–690PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Jan YT, Yang FS, Huang JK (2005) Visualization rate and pattern of normal appendix on multi-detector computed tomography by using multi-planar reformation display. J Comput Assist Tomogr 29:446–451PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Johnson PT, Horton KM, Mahesh M, Fishman EK (2006) Multidetector computed tomography for suspected appendicitis: Multi-institutional survey of 16-MDCT data acquisition protocols and review of pertinent literature. J Comput Assist Tomogr 30:758–764PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Johnson PT, Horton KM, Kawamoto S et al (2009) MDCT for suspected appendicitis: Effect of reconstruction section thickness on diagnostic accuracy, rate of appendiceal visualization, and reader confidence using axial images. Am J Roentgenol 192:893–901CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Kamel IR, Goldberg SN, Keogan MT, Rosen MP, Raptopoulos V (2000) Right lower quadrant pain and suspected appendicitis: Non-focused appendiceal CT–review of 100 cases. Radiology 217:159–163PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Keyzer C, Tack D, De Maertelaer V, Bohy P, Gevenois PA, Van Gansbeke D (2004) Acute appendicitis: Comparison of low-dose and standard-dose unenhanced multi-detector row CT. Radiology 232:164–172PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Keyzer C, Pargov S, Tack D et al (2008) Normal appendix in adults: Reproducibility of detection with unenhanced and contrast-enhanced MDCT. Am J Roentgenol 191:507–514CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Keyzer C, Cullus P, Tack D, De Maertelaer V, Bohy P, Gevenois PA (2009) MDCT for suspected acute appendicitis in adults: Impact of oral and IV contrast media at standard-dose and simulated low-dose techniques. Am J Roentgenol 193:1272–1281CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Kim HC, Yang DM, Jin W, Park SJ (2008) Added diagnostic value of multi-planar reformation of multi-detector CT data in patients with suspected appendicitis. Radiographics 28:393–405PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Krieg AF, Gambino R, Galen RS (1975) Why are clinical laboratory tests performed? When are they valid? JAMA 233:76–78PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Lane MJ, Liu DM, Huynh MD, Jeffrey RB Jr, Mindelzun RE, Katz DS (1999) Suspected acute appendicitis: Non-enhanced helical CT in 300 consecutive patients. Radiology 213:341–346PubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Macari M, Balthazar EJ (2003) The acute right lower quadrant: CT evaluation. Radiol Clin North Am 41:1117–1136PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Moteki T, Horikoshi H (2007) New CT criterion for acute appendicitis: Maximum depth of intraluminal appendiceal fluid. Am J Roentgenol 188:1313–1319CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Mun S, Ernst RD, Chen K, Oto A, Shah S, Mileski WJ (2006) Rapid CT diagnosis of acute appendicitis with IV contrast material. Emerg Radiol 12:99–102PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Nikolaidis P, Hwang CM, Miller FH, Papanicolaou N (2004) The non-visualized appendix: Incidence of acute appendicitis when secondary inflammatory changes are absent. Am J Roentgenol 183:889–892Google Scholar
  33. No authors (1998) Executive summary of the clinical guidelines on the identification, evaluation, and treatment of overweight and obesity in adults. Arch Intern Med 158:1855–1867Google Scholar
  34. O’Malley ME, Halpern E, Mueller PR, Gazelle GS (2000) Helical CT protocols for the abdomen and pelvis: a survey. Am J Roentgenol 175:109–113Google Scholar
  35. Paulson EK, Coursey CA (2009) CT protocols for acute appendicitis: Time for change. Am J Roentgenol 193:1268–1271CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Paulson EK, Harris JP, Jaffe TA, Haugan PA, Nelson RC (2005) Acute appendicitis: Added diagnostic value of coronal reformations from isotropic voxels at multi-detector row CT. Radiology 235:879–885PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Pinto Leite N, Pereira JM, Cunha R, Pinto P, Sirlin C (2005) CT evaluation of appendicitis and its complications: Imaging techniques and key diagnostic findings. Am J Roentgenol 185:406–417Google Scholar
  38. Platon A, Jlassi H, Rutschmann OT et al (2009) Evaluation of a low-dose CT protocol with oral contrast for assessment of acute appendicitis. Eur Radiol 19:446–454PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Poortman P, Lohle PN, Schoemaker CM et al (2003) Comparison of CT and sonography in the diagnosis of acute appendicitis: a blinded prospective study. Am J Roentgenol 181:1355–1359Google Scholar
  40. Raman SS, Lu DS, Kadell BM, Vodopich DJ, Sayre J, Cryer H (2002) Accuracy of non-focused helical CT for the diagnosis of acute appendicitis: a 5 year review. Am J Roentgenol 178:1319–1325Google Scholar
  41. Rao PM, Rhea JT, Novelline RA et al (1997a) Helical CT technique for the diagnosis of appendicitis: Prospective evaluation of a focused appendix CT examination. Radiology 202:139–144PubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. Rao PM, Rhea JT, Novelline RA, Mostafavi AA, Lawrason JN, McCabe CJ (1997b) Helical CT combined with contrast material administered only through the colon for imaging of suspected appendicitis. Am J Roentgenol 169:1275–1280Google Scholar
  43. Rao PM, Rhea JT, Novelline RA (1997c) Sensitivity and specificity of the individual CT signs of appendicitis: Experience with 200 helical appendiceal CT examinations. J Comput Assist Tomogr 21:686–692PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Rao PM, Wittenberg J, McDowell RK, Rhea JT, Novelline RA (1997d) Appendicitis: use of arrowhead sign for diagnosis at CT. Radiology 202:363–366PubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. Rao PM, Rhea JT, Novelline RA (1997e) Helical computed tomographic incidence and characterization of appendoliths in 100 patients with appendicitis. Emerg Radiol 4:55–61CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Raptopoulos V, Katsou G, Rosen MP, Siewert B, Goldberg SN, Kruskal JB (2003) Acute appendicitis: Effect of increased use of CT on selecting patients earlier. Radiology 226:521–526PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Seo H, Lee KH, Kim HJ et al (2009) Diagnosis of acute appendicitis with sliding slab ray-sum interpretation of low-dose unenhanced CT and standard-dose i.v. contrast-enhanced CT scans. Am J Roentgenol 193:96–105CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Tamburrini S, Brunetti A, Brown M, Sirlin CB, Casola G (2005) CT appearance of the normal appendix in adults. Eur Radiol 15:2096–2103PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Tamburrini S, Brunetti A, Brown M, Sirlin C, Casola G (2007) Acute appendicitis: Diagnostic value of non-enhanced CT with selective use of contrast in routine clinical settings. Eur Radiol 17:2055–2061PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Tsuboi M, Takase K, Kaneda I et al (2008) Perforated and non-perforated appendicitis: Defect in enhancing appendiceal wall–depiction with multi-detector row CT. Radiology 246:142–147PubMedGoogle Scholar
  51. Webb EM, Wang ZJ, Coakley FV, Poder L, Westphalen AC, Yeh BM (2010) The equivocal appendix at CT: Prevalence in a control population. Emerg Radiol 17:57–61PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Weltman DI, Yu J, Krumenacker J Jr, Huang S, Moh P (2000) Diagnosis of acute appendicitis: Comparison of 5 and 10 mm CT sections in the same patient. Radiology 216:172–177PubMedGoogle Scholar
  53. Wijetunga R, Tan BS, Rouse JC, Bigg-Wither GW, Doust BD (2001) Diagnostic accuracy of focused appendiceal CT in clinically equivocal cases of acute appendicitis. Radiology 221:747–753PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Wise SW, Labuski MR, Kasales CJ et al (2001) Comparative assessment of CT and sonographic techniques for appendiceal imaging. Am J Roentgenol 176:933–941Google Scholar
  55. Wolfe JM, Smithline H, Lee S, Coughlin B, Polino J, Blank F (2006) The impact of body mass index on concordance in the interpretation of matched non-contrast and contrast abdominal pelvic computed tomographic scans in ED patients with non-traumatic abdominal pain. Am J Emerg Med 24:144–148PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of RadiologyHôpital Erasme, Université libre de BruxellesBrusselsBelgium

Personalised recommendations